| Literature DB >> 35787805 |
Chen Chen1,2, Cheng Chen1,3, Mingrui Ma4, Xiaojian Ma4, Xiaoyi Lv5,6, Xiaogang Dong7, Ziwei Yan1,3, Min Zhu8, Jiajia Chen9.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Liver cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in the world, ranking fifth in malignant tumors. The degree of differentiation can reflect the degree of malignancy. The degree of malignancy of liver cancer can be divided into three types: poorly differentiated, moderately differentiated, and well differentiated. Diagnosis and treatment of different levels of differentiation are crucial to the survival rate and survival time of patients. As the gold standard for liver cancer diagnosis, histopathological images can accurately distinguish liver cancers of different levels of differentiation. Therefore, the study of intelligent classification of histopathological images is of great significance to patients with liver cancer. At present, the classification of histopathological images of liver cancer with different degrees of differentiation has disadvantages such as time-consuming, labor-intensive, and large manual investment. In this context, the importance of intelligent classification of histopathological images is obvious.Entities:
Keywords: Degree of differentiation of the whole type; Histopathological images of liver cancer; Intelligent classification; SENet
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35787805 PMCID: PMC9254605 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-022-01919-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak ISSN: 1472-6947 Impact factor: 3.298
Basic patient information
| Differentiation | Age | Gender | Staging | Alcoholism | Smoking | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | W | I | II | III | IV | Y | N | Y | N | ||
| Poorly differentiated | 35–50 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 5 | 5 |
| 51–66 | 6 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 4 | |
| 67–82 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 7 | |
| Moderate differentiation | 35–50 | 8 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 5 |
| 51–66 | 12 | 2 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 8 | 8 | 6 | |
| 67–82 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 3 | |
| Well differentiated | 35–50 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| 51–66 | 12 | 1 | 11 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 5 | 8 | |
| 67–82 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 3 | |
Fig. 1Flowchart of data acquisition
Experimental environment
| Category | Name | Version |
|---|---|---|
| CPU | IntelCore I5 9600KF | – |
| RAM | 32G 2666 MHz | – |
| GPU | NVIDIA GTX 1070 | – |
| Development language | Python | V3.7.0 |
| Image processing library | Sci-kit image | V0.16.2 |
| Data processing library | Numpy | V1.17.2 |
| Deep learning framework 1 | Sci-kit learn | V0.22 |
| Machine learning library | TensorFlow | V2.1.0 |
| Deep learning framework 2 | Keras | V2.3.1 |
Fig. 2Experimental frame diagram
Data partition
| Differentiation type | Raw data | Enhanced data | Training set | Test set |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poorly differentiated | 144 | 5184 | 4176 | 1008 |
| Moderate differentiation | 168 | 6048 | 4860 | 1188 |
| Well differentiated | 132 | 4752 | 3816 | 936 |
Confusion matrix
| Actual class | ||
|---|---|---|
| Positive class | Negative class | |
| Positive class | True Positive (TP) | False Positive (FP) |
| Negative class | False negative (FN) | True negative (TN) |
Fig. 4Confusion matrix of different models
Classification accuracy of histopathological images of liver cancer
| Classifier | Poorly differentiated | Moderate differentiation | Well differentiated | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VGG16 | 77.98 | 79.12 | 73.08 | 76.95 |
| ResNet50 | 96.43 | 90.99 | 94.22 | |
| ResNet50_CBAM | 95.24 | 94.76 | 94.73 | |
| SENet | 92.59 | 95.30 | ||
| SKNet | 96.43 | 93.94 | 95.30 | 95.15 |
Bold indicates the highest accuracy
Unit:%
Fig. 3Classification accuracy curves
Evaluation indexes of different models
| Differentiation type | Metrics | VGG16 | ResNet50 | ResNet50_CBAM | SENet | SKNet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poorly differentiated | Precision | 70.43 | 90.08 | 90.48 | 92.02 | |
| Recall | 77.98 | 96.43 | 95.24 | 96.43 | ||
| F1 Score | 74.01 | 93.15 | 92.80 | 94.28 | ||
| Moderate differentiation | Precision | 77.56 | 96.60 | 98.21 | 96.21 | |
| Recall | 79.12 | 90.99 | 92.59 | 93.94 | ||
| F1 Score | 78.33 | 93.71 | 95.32 | 95.06 | ||
| Well differentiated | Precision | 85.07 | 96.15 | 95.07 | 95.50 | |
| Recall | 73.08 | 94.76 | 95.30 | 95.30 | ||
| F1 Score | 78.62 | 96.04 | 94.92 | 95.40 |
Bold indicates the highest accuracy
Unit:%